• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why Do Democrats Keep Siding With Criminals?

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I know the usual Democrat apologists will try to deny that liberals constantly side with criminals over middle America, so let’s put that one to rest right now…

1) A gigantic spotlight has been shined on two liberal judges in Vermont and Massachutes (largely due to Bill O’Reilly) who recently sentenced one man to 60 days and the other to NO TIME at all, both for child rape. One judge explained his decision by saying he does not believe in punishment anymore. Spoken like a true liberal. These cases are FAR from isolated, but they are the most infamous right now.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,181214,00.html



2) It is common knowledge that criminals overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. This is why Democrats keep trying to give violent felons the right to vote. In Election 2000 they claimed Al Gore would have won if only violent felons (you know, the people who have proved themselves to have horrible judgment) were allowed to help determine who our representatives were. Of course, Democrats claim that it’s racist to prevent so many blacks from voting-with no mention of the fact that no one forces blacks to commit the violent crimes. Like many, many other things, Democrats play the race card to distract from the appalling reality of what they are advocating, and to camouflage their calculated, self-serving, partisan intent.

But of course, Democrats would never trust a violent ex-felon’s 2nd Amendment rights because…they’ve demonstrated how horrible their judgment is…but we can trust their judgment to pick the leaders of our country.


3) In addition to fighting for the rights of sex-offenders to not be tracked and registered; in addition to arguing in a Kansas City courtroom that a 15 year old boy has a Constitutional right to sleep with grown men; in addition to fighting Jessica’s law; in addition to fighting mandatory minimum sentences for molesters, the ACLU (backed and funded by Democrats-and tax dollars) has now decided to represent, in every single state, NAMBLA-the pro-molestation group-free of charge, in trials all over the country, at a MAXIMUM expense to taxpayers.

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200402270920.asp

4) It is overwhelmingly well-known that those who oppose the death penalty are almost always Democrats (and Bill O’Reilly).

5) Democrats have whined, moaned about and opposed EVERY SINGLE ACTION the president has taken to prevent further terrorist attacks since 9/11. Guantanamo Bay, the Patriot Act, wiretapping terrorist phone calls, taking out a genocidal terror sponsor in Iraq and giving the terrorists a VOLUNTEER MILITARY target instead of a Lower Manhattan CIVILIAN target….EVERY SINGLE THING.

And they haven’t just opposed these things, they’ve used them to incessantly smear Bush and compare him to Hitler. Republicans actually DO something about foreign threats. None of it has been unconstitutional, and the American people overwhelmingly have supported most of the president’s national security decisions-because they are things we should have been doing for the FIRST decade in which Bin Laden was attacking us with impunity. But at that time, we had a criminal-friendly Democrat in office, so we spent that time further tying the hands of the FBI and the CIA instead.

6) Democrats are the ones who made it so that ILLEGAL aliens could come to this country and face no consequences. They are also the reason ILLEGAL aliens qualify for welfare benefits and free healthcare at our expense.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43275


7) Perhaps if sleazy, ambulance-chasing, economy-raping trial lawyers weren’t such a huge source of campaign contributions to Democrats, Democrats wouldn’t constantly give the clients of trial lawyers everything under the sun at taxpayer expense. Trial lawyers give almost exclusively to Democrats.

http://www.triallawyersinc.com/healthcare/hc07.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/copland200411080818.asp

Now that we have preemptively put to rest any potential attempts to blur the issue, let’s have an honest discussion about why liberals side with criminals.
 
Last edited:

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aquapub said:
I know the usual Democrat apologists will try to deny that liberals constantly side with criminals over middle America, so let’s put that one to rest right now…

1) A gigantic spotlight has been shined on two liberal judges in Vermont and Massachutes (largely due to Bill O’Reilly) who recently sentenced one man to 60 days and the other to NO TIME at all, both for child rape. One judge explained his decision by saying he does not believe in punishment anymore. Spoken like a true liberal. These cases are FAR from isolated, but they are the most infamous right now.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,181214,00.html



2) It is common knowledge that criminals overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. This is why Democrats keep trying to give violent felons the right to vote. In Election 2000 they claimed Al Gore would have won if only violent felons (you know, the people who have proved themselves to have horrible judgment) were allowed to help determine who our representatives were. Of course, Democrats claim that it’s racist to prevent so many blacks from voting-with no mention of the fact that no one forces blacks to commit the violent crimes. Like many, many other things, Democrats play the race card to distract from the appalling reality of what they are advocating, and to camouflage their calculated, self-serving, partisan intent.

But of course, Democrats would never trust a violent ex-felon’s 2nd Amendment rights because…they’ve demonstrated how horrible their judgment is…but we can trust their judgment to pick the leaders of our country.


3) In addition to fighting for the rights of sex-offenders to not be tracked and registered; in addition to arguing in a Kansas City courtroom that a 15 year old boy has a Constitutional right to sleep with grown men; in addition to fighting Jessica’s law; in addition to fighting mandatory minimum sentences for molesters, the ACLU (backed and funded by Democrats-and tax dollars) has now decided to represent, in every single state, NAMBLA-the pro-molestation group-free of charge, in trials all over the country, at a MAXIMUM expense to taxpayers.

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200402270920.asp

4) It is overwhelmingly well-known that those who oppose the death penalty are almost always Democrats (and Bill O’Reilly).

5) Democrats have whined, moaned about and opposed EVERY SINGLE ACTION the president has taken to prevent further terrorist attacks since 9/11. Guantanamo Bay, the Patriot Act, wiretapping terrorist phone calls, taking out a genocidal terror sponsor in Iraq and giving the terrorists a VOLUNTEER MILITARY target instead of a Lower Manhattan CIVILIAN target….EVERY SINGLE THING.

And they haven’t just opposed these things, they’ve used them to incessantly smear Bush and compare him to Hitler. Republicans actually DO something about foreign threats. None of it has been unconstitutional, and the American people overwhelmingly have supported most of the president’s national security decisions-because they are things we should have been doing for the FIRST decade in which Bin Laden was attacking us with impunity. But at that time, we had a criminal-friendly Democrat in office, so we spent that time further tying the hands of the FBI and the CIA instead.

6) Democrats are the ones who made it so that ILLEGAL aliens could come to this country and face no consequences. They are also the reason ILLEGAL aliens qualify for welfare benefits and free healthcare at our expense.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43275


7) Perhaps if sleazy, ambulance-chasing, economy-raping trial lawyers weren’t such a huge source of campaign contributions to Democrats, Democrats wouldn’t constantly give the clients of trial lawyers everything under the sun at taxpayer expense. Trial lawyers give almost exclusively to Democrats.

http://www.triallawyersinc.com/healthcare/hc07.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/copland200411080818.asp

Now that we have preemptively put to rest any potential attempts to blur the issue, let’s have an honest discussion about why liberals side with criminals.
I completely agree with you. Proof of your argument is Hilary siding with Bush on Iraq.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,215
Reaction score
1,702
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well this is pretty darn disgusting if you ask me. Pedophiles don't belong on the street, they belong in prison attending mental health seminars. I would invite you to bear in mind that extreme liberalism like this is certainly bad, but it doesn't represent mainstream liberals any more than Ann Coulter represents mainstream Republicans. Extremes bring out the worst in both ideologies.

But to try and answer your question in the title, it's not so much about siding with criminals, as it is siding with whatever can bring the crime rate down. We know from experience (and a 70% recidivism rate) that prison time doesn't deter crime all that much. But rehabilitation programs that teach valuable trade skills have been considerably effective. In that regard, it doesn't matter if we have compassion for the criminal or not, what matters is he'll be out in a few years and has an opportunity to establish a crime-free life. Of course, whether or not he takes that opportunity is totally up to him, but quite a number of them do. If he gets out of prison and all he knows is how to steal, he'll be right back at it and probably harder to catch.

Some liberals (like those judges) take that philosophy to the extreme. Since prison doesn't deter, why even send people to them, right? Wrong! Prison may not be a deterrant, but it is a deserved punishment and it keeps them from putting society into more jeapordy.

I personally think really sick criminals like rapists, child molestors, and serial murderers should always be jailed for life. But drug users and other petty criminals can be rehabilitated, with the right programs. I have 2 older brothers who are living proof of that!

I know that doesn't justify letting pedophiles off scott free, but hopefully it describes the tendancy to be that stupid without really meaning to. :2razz:
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
danarhea said:
I completely agree with you. Proof of your argument is Hilary siding with Bush on Iraq.

I will take your avoidance of the topic as a confirmation that you have no argument. ;)
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
aquapub said:
But of course, Democrats would never trust a violent ex-felon’s 2nd Amendment rights because…they’ve demonstrated how horrible their judgment is…but we can trust their judgment to pick the leaders of our country.
So, as a republican, do you believe violent ex-felons should have 2nd amendment rights? If not, does that make you siding with the democrats? If so, does that make you siding with the criminals. Doesn't seem like you can win there. :rofl
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
shuamort said:
So, as a republican, do you believe violent ex-felons should have 2nd amendment rights? If not, does that make you siding with the democrats? If so, does that make you siding with the criminals. Doesn't seem like you can win there. :rofl
You will find very few pro-2nd amendment people who support felons regaining their right to arms -- if any. Straw, man.
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
M14 Shooter said:
You will find very few pro-2nd amendment people who support felons regaining their right to arms -- if any. Straw, man.
I'm elucidating aquapub's hypocritical point. Please follow.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
shuamort said:
I'm elucidating aquapub's hypocritical point. Please follow.
You mean that's what you're trying to do.
You picked a poor example with which to do it.
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
M14 Shooter said:
You mean that's what you're trying to do.
You picked a poor example with which to do it.
Feel free to deciminate it with debate instead of just "saying so". Aquapub is accusing democrats of doing something that republicans do as well. I've pointed that out. Your argument has thus far been nonsense like usual.
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
shuamort said:
So, as a republican, do you believe violent ex-felons should have 2nd amendment rights? If not, does that make you siding with the democrats? If so, does that make you siding with the criminals. Doesn't seem like you can win there. :rofl
:rofl ????? Youve got to be kidding. Please stop devastating me with your rapier wit. :roll:

That point is completely irrational.

That point would stand on its own logic if I were the one asserting that violent felons SHOULD ever be trusted. I consider violent crimes an automatic forfeiture of all but the most basic rights. Unlike Democrats, I am not contradicting myself here.

Democrats can see that the judgement of violent felons is not to be trusted in every way EXCEPT the one that happens to give Democrats a voter base-violent felons having the right to elect our representatives.

Democrats don't even seem to care about the inconsistencies like this in their "logic." It seems all they care about is power, regardless of truth.
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
aquapub said:
:rofl ????? Youve got to be kidding. Please stop devastating me with your rapier wit. :roll:

That point is completely irrational.

That point would stand on its own logic if I were the one asserting that violent felons SHOULD ever be trusted. I consider violent crimes an automatic forfeiture of all but the most basic rights. Unlike Democrats, I am not contradicting myself here.

Democrats can see that the judgement of violent felons is not to be trusted in every way EXCEPT the one that happens to give Democrats a voter base-violent felons having the right to elect our representatives.

Democrats don't even seem to care about the inconsistencies like this in their "logic." It seems all they care about is power, regardless of truth.
You're the helmet-wearing, short-bus riding, retard that brought up the point to support your lame point. Can't have it both ways buck-o. If you condemn the dems for doing the thing you, yourself, support, why point it out as a negative?
 

alphieb

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,982
Reaction score
31
Location
Vincennes IN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
aquapub said:
I know the usual Democrat apologists will try to deny that liberals constantly side with criminals over middle America, so let’s put that one to rest right now…

1) A gigantic spotlight has been shined on two liberal judges in Vermont and Massachutes (largely due to Bill O’Reilly) who recently sentenced one man to 60 days and the other to NO TIME at all, both for child rape. One judge explained his decision by saying he does not believe in punishment anymore. Spoken like a true liberal. These cases are FAR from isolated, but they are the most infamous right now.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,181214,00.html



2) It is common knowledge that criminals overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. This is why Democrats keep trying to give violent felons the right to vote. In Election 2000 they claimed Al Gore would have won if only violent felons (you know, the people who have proved themselves to have horrible judgment) were allowed to help determine who our representatives were. Of course, Democrats claim that it’s racist to prevent so many blacks from voting-with no mention of the fact that no one forces blacks to commit the violent crimes. Like many, many other things, Democrats play the race card to distract from the appalling reality of what they are advocating, and to camouflage their calculated, self-serving, partisan intent.

But of course, Democrats would never trust a violent ex-felon’s 2nd Amendment rights because…they’ve demonstrated how horrible their judgment is…but we can trust their judgment to pick the leaders of our country.


3) In addition to fighting for the rights of sex-offenders to not be tracked and registered; in addition to arguing in a Kansas City courtroom that a 15 year old boy has a Constitutional right to sleep with grown men; in addition to fighting Jessica’s law; in addition to fighting mandatory minimum sentences for molesters, the ACLU (backed and funded by Democrats-and tax dollars) has now decided to represent, in every single state, NAMBLA-the pro-molestation group-free of charge, in trials all over the country, at a MAXIMUM expense to taxpayers.

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200402270920.asp

4) It is overwhelmingly well-known that those who oppose the death penalty are almost always Democrats (and Bill O’Reilly).

5) Democrats have whined, moaned about and opposed EVERY SINGLE ACTION the president has taken to prevent further terrorist attacks since 9/11. Guantanamo Bay, the Patriot Act, wiretapping terrorist phone calls, taking out a genocidal terror sponsor in Iraq and giving the terrorists a VOLUNTEER MILITARY target instead of a Lower Manhattan CIVILIAN target….EVERY SINGLE THING.

And they haven’t just opposed these things, they’ve used them to incessantly smear Bush and compare him to Hitler. Republicans actually DO something about foreign threats. None of it has been unconstitutional, and the American people overwhelmingly have supported most of the president’s national security decisions-because they are things we should have been doing for the FIRST decade in which Bin Laden was attacking us with impunity. But at that time, we had a criminal-friendly Democrat in office, so we spent that time further tying the hands of the FBI and the CIA instead.

6) Democrats are the ones who made it so that ILLEGAL aliens could come to this country and face no consequences. They are also the reason ILLEGAL aliens qualify for welfare benefits and free healthcare at our expense.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43275


7) Perhaps if sleazy, ambulance-chasing, economy-raping trial lawyers weren’t such a huge source of campaign contributions to Democrats, Democrats wouldn’t constantly give the clients of trial lawyers everything under the sun at taxpayer expense. Trial lawyers give almost exclusively to Democrats.

http://www.triallawyersinc.com/healthcare/hc07.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/copland200411080818.asp

Now that we have preemptively put to rest any potential attempts to blur the issue, let’s have an honest discussion about why liberals side with criminals.
Didn't Bush get a bunch of felons in Florida to rig the polls?:spin:
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
aquapub said:
:rofl ????? Youve got to be kidding. Please stop devastating me with your rapier wit. :roll:

That point is completely irrational.

That point would stand on its own logic if I were the one asserting that violent felons SHOULD ever be trusted. I consider violent crimes an automatic forfeiture of all but the most basic rights. Unlike Democrats, I am not contradicting myself here.

Democrats can see that the judgement of violent felons is not to be trusted in every way EXCEPT the one that happens to give Democrats a voter base-violent felons having the right to elect our representatives.

Democrats don't even seem to care about the inconsistencies like this in their "logic." It seems all they care about is power, regardless of truth.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that revoking a CITIZENS right to vote because he committed a crime 20 years ago is deeply unconstitutional. They've paid their debt to society. There is no reason they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Kelzie said:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that revoking a CITIZENS right to vote because he committed a crime 20 years ago is deeply unconstitutional. They've paid their debt to society. There is no reason they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
That should be a state issue...

Depending upon the state, that "20 years" is a variable...don't know the maximun a certain state has though...I don't know if any state has "forever"...
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
cnredd said:
That should be a state issue...

Depending upon the state, that "20 years" is a variable...don't know the maximun a certain state has though...I don't know if any state has "forever"...
Several do. Fourteen states in fact will not allow ex-felons to vote for their entire lives. "20 years" was an arbitrary number to show how ridiculous it is to basically strip someone of their citizenship for a crime they committed when they were young and stupid and have already paid their debt to society for.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by Kelzie:
Several do. Fourteen states in fact will not allow ex-felons to vote for their entire lives. "20 years" was an arbitrary number to show how ridiculous it is to basically strip someone of their citizenship for a crime they committed when they were young and stupid and have already paid their debt to society for.
I'm not sure if I can handle your liberal attitude.
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
shuamort said:
You're the helmet-wearing, short-bus riding, retard that brought up the point to support your lame point. Can't have it both ways buck-o. If you condemn the dems for doing the thing you, yourself, support, why point it out as a negative?
You can't be this stupid. I CAN condemn Democrats for CONTRADICTING themselves. And if Democrats are going to take both sides of an issue, I inevitably will agree with them half the time. Jesus, you are being an idiot!
 
Last edited:

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Kelzie said:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that revoking a CITIZENS right to vote because he committed a crime 20 years ago is deeply unconstitutional. They've paid their debt to society. There is no reason they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

The Constitution in no way involves itself in issue. And we are talking about violent felons here , not jaywalkers.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
aquapub said:
The Constitution in no way involves itself in issue. And we are talking about violent felons here , not jaywalkers.
And so what? They go to jail and serve their debt to society. Exactly what would make them incapable of voting?
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
aquapub said:
I know the usual Democrat apologists will try to deny that liberals constantly side with criminals over middle America, so let’s put that one to rest right now…
Congratulations on contributing nothing positive but keeping the country split with ideological labeling! At least O' Reilly does it for money! What's your excuse?
 

disneydude

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
25,528
Reaction score
8,470
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Its not that Democrats side with Criminals, its that Democrats stand up for Constitutional Rights that apply to all.
This Country once stood for the proposition that it is better that 9 guilty go free than one innocent person be convicted --- but slowly this has faded away. And the sad thing is that not only are there vast numbers in this country who sit back complacently and allow this to happen, but that there are vast numbers of advocates that are fighting for this to occur
I understand the emotion of "Victim rights adovocates" and I cannot say that I don't agree with their views. However, I also recognize that their cause comes at the expense of the erosion of civil rights for us all.
It has been said that the measure of the civility of a country lies in the manner in which they treat the worst among them.
Its a sad day in America when we are willing to give up the rights our ancestors fought for to satisfy an appetite for vengence.
 

debate_junkie

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Kelzie said:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that revoking a CITIZENS right to vote because he committed a crime 20 years ago is deeply unconstitutional. They've paid their debt to society. There is no reason they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
In Pennsylvania.. as the law stands now, felons' right to vote is restored when they've completed their jail time, but still on probation. There is legislation being proposed.. A) to require ID being shown at all polling places, and B) that felons have completely served their time.. probation included.

I don't see how it makes a difference WHEN the right to vote is restored. The states need to be free to decide this for themselves. And furthermore... felony convictions are usually the worst of the worst in crime's. What "debt" do you speak of? Would this even be an issue of said felon's had conducted themselves in the manner of the law to begin with?
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
debate_junkie said:
In Pennsylvania.. as the law stands now, felons' right to vote is restored when they've completed their jail time, but still on probation. There is legislation being proposed.. A) to require ID being shown at all polling places, and B) that felons have completely served their time.. probation included.

I don't see how it makes a difference WHEN the right to vote is restored. The states need to be free to decide this for themselves. And furthermore... felony convictions are usually the worst of the worst in crime's. What "debt" do you speak of? Would this even be an issue of said felon's had conducted themselves in the manner of the law to begin with?
That's only in Pennsylvania. Fourteen states permanantly remove a felon's right to vote.

And it's not the worst of the worst. I have a friend charged with a felony. She shoplifted, which in and of itself isn't a felony, but she took the tags off to get it out of the store. Which is. Now, I'm not saying what she did was right, but never being able to vote for something you did when you were 18?
 

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I found it interesting how year after year there had been reports on how the DNC continually practiced driving convicted felons to the polls to vote. True or not, the news story broke several months ago that several Democrats tried to push through legislation that would strip states of the right to decide if felons could vote or not and make it legal for them to do so anyway. Hillary clinton was even part of that team that submitted the legislation for a vote. The bill never made it to the floor for a vote, as someone with half a brain figured out that S*** would hit the fan with the public if they ever heard about politicians trying to finally make their perceived past practices legal by stripping states of their rights!

I could make the truly partisan joke, answering the question of why Dems always seem to side with criminals, by reminding everyone that their last President IS a convicted Felon for his perjurous testimonyunder oath before a grand jury...but I won't go there. :doh :cool:
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by easyt65
I found it interesting how year after year there had been reports on how the DNC continually practiced driving convicted felons to the polls to vote. True or not, the news story broke several months ago that several Democrats tried to push through legislation that would strip states of the right to decide if felons could vote or not and make it legal for them to do so anyway. Hillary clinton was even part of that team that submitted the legislation for a vote. The bill never made it to the floor for a vote, as someone with half a brain figured out that S*** would hit the fan with the public if they ever heard about politicians trying to finally make their perceived past practices legal by stripping states of their rights!

I could make the truly partisan joke, answering the question of why Dems always seem to side with criminals, by reminding everyone that their last President IS a convicted Felon for his perjurous testimonyunder oath before a grand jury...but I won't go there.
I found it interesting that the Republicans elected a coke addict.
 
Top Bottom